Department of Ultrasound, The First Hospital of China Medical University, No. 155 Nanjing North Street, Heping District, Shenyang City, 110001, China.
Department of Transplantation and General Surgery, The First Hospital of China Medical University, No. 155 Nanjing North Street, Heping District, Shenyang City, 110001, China.
Eur Radiol. 2019 Feb;29(2):725-735. doi: 10.1007/s00330-018-5609-6. Epub 2018 Jul 10.
To assess the performance of sonoelastography for differential diagnosis between malignant and benign parotid lesions using a meta-analysis.
An independent literature search of English medical databases, such as PubMed, Embase and Medline ( Embase.com ), Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Ovid was performed. The diagnostic accuracy of sonoelastography was compared with that of histopathology and/or cytology, which was used as reference standard. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated to evaluate the accuracy of sonoelastography. A meta-regression analysis evaluating imaging mechanisms, shear wave elastography techniques, assessment methods and QUADAS scores was performed.
Ten eligible studies that included a total sample of 711 patients with 725 parotid lesions were included. Sonoelastography showed a pooled sensitivity of 0.67 (95% CI 0.59-0.74), specificity of 0.64 (95% CI 0.60-0.68), DOR of 8.00 (95% CI 2.96-21.63) and an AUC of 0.77. The results of the meta-regression analysis revealed that no heterogeneity was due to the imaging mechanism (p = 0.119), shear wave elastography technique (p = 0.473) or QUADAS score (p = 0.462). However, the assessment method was a significant factor that affected the study heterogeneity (p = 0.035). According to the subgroup analysis, quantitative and semiquantitative methods performed better than qualitative ones.
Overall, sonoelastography has a limited value for differential diagnosis between malignant and benign parotid lesions. Quantitative and semiquantitative methods perform better than qualitative ones.
• Overall, sonoelastography has a limited value for differential diagnosis between malignant and benign parotid lesions. • Quantitative and semiquantitative assessment methods perform better than qualitative ones. • Semiquantitative and quantitative methods are automatically calculated by an ultrasound machine and are thus less operator-dependent.
通过荟萃分析评估超声弹性成像在良恶性腮腺病变鉴别诊断中的性能。
对英文医学数据库(如 PubMed、Embase 和 Medline(Embase.com)、Web of Science、Cochrane Library 和 Ovid)进行独立的文献检索。将超声弹性成像的诊断准确性与组织病理学和/或细胞学进行比较,后者作为参考标准。计算汇总敏感性、特异性、诊断比值比(DOR)和曲线下面积(AUC),以评估超声弹性成像的准确性。进行了一项荟萃回归分析,评估成像机制、剪切波弹性成像技术、评估方法和 QUADAS 评分。
纳入了 10 项符合条件的研究,共纳入 711 例患者的 725 个腮腺病变。超声弹性成像的汇总敏感性为 0.67(95%CI 0.59-0.74),特异性为 0.64(95%CI 0.60-0.68),DOR 为 8.00(95%CI 2.96-21.63),AUC 为 0.77。荟萃回归分析结果表明,成像机制(p = 0.119)、剪切波弹性成像技术(p = 0.473)或 QUADAS 评分(p = 0.462)并非异质性的原因。然而,评估方法是影响研究异质性的一个重要因素(p = 0.035)。根据亚组分析,定量和半定量方法的性能优于定性方法。
总体而言,超声弹性成像在良恶性腮腺病变的鉴别诊断中价值有限。定量和半定量方法的性能优于定性方法。
• 总体而言,超声弹性成像在良恶性腮腺病变的鉴别诊断中价值有限。• 定量和半定量评估方法的性能优于定性方法。• 半定量和定量方法由超声机自动计算,因此对操作者的依赖性较小。